5 replies to this topic

[Alex A.]

Hi Everyone,

 

I am looking for some advice, hope someone can help me.

I am working in a meat cutting plant (UK), we are BRC certified and just recently purchased a new machine to start packing raw red meat in Modified Atmosphere. We are only going to do raw beef at the moment and we are going to use pre mixed gas 80% O2, 20% CO2, that comes with a certificate. Our aim with this is to get a better visual appearance for the red meat, not to increase shelf-life.

I am in the process of updating all the documents and creating new procedures, calibration, maintenance, trainings, shelf-life testing, updating HACCP etc.. We are currently using Vacuum packaging as our packaging method, so this MAP machine will bring a new packaging technology to the site and I don’t have much experience with MAP.

I read some different opinions, whether the gas mixture is going to be a CCP or not. I was suggested to purchase a gas checker to check and record the gas percentages during production. As the gas is premixed and comes with a COA, would it still require to be checked frequently or would the COA be enough to support the validation?

Also, is seal integrity something that I should consider as a CCP?

 

Thank you

 

Alex

 

[Scampi]

Assuming your only talking about whole cuts not minced?? 

(minced is a different ballgame)

 

Seal integrity is NOT a CCP as all your losing is shelf (which affects $$ but not food safety)

 

I would not be testing the gas if it comes with a CoA for each canister not worth your time and money IMHO

 

Generally speaking, packaging is never a CCP but you could put in process controls or a control point

[GMO]

I will start with the proviso that this is your plant and your process.  You need to decide as a team if it's a CCP or not.  So strictly speaking, I shouldn't give my view.

 

But also, no and no.

 

Because I always speak my mind...

 

Firstly, remember HACCP is all about food safety.  So if you had the incorrect gas mix or even no gas, what food safety risk will be present?  I'd argue it's more likely to be a quality risk.

 

On the packaging, it's more arguable an open pack is going to be a risk of deliberate contamination but no more than anything else.  And you have to assume that if something was obviously open a consumer might have some common sense.  A determined attacker will do something without you being able to tell anyway.

 

Now, if you have a decent quality plan and want to make sure you don't have beef browning from the incorrect gas mix or leaks, that's a different issue.  Now you might want to put in controls around gas mix and leakers but they're not CCPs because that's for quality.  Personally I would do both because even with a CoA you don't know if the gas flushing has worked properly.  You don't have to test every pack, perhaps start up, end of run and periodically?  E.g. every hour or 4 hours depending on volume?  Also consider what you do if you have a leaker or incorrect mix.  So it might be worth trialling what would happen if you didn't fully gas flush, do you need to rework?  How much would you be prepared to rework if you need to?  That helps determine your test interval.

[G M]

... As the gas is premixed and comes with a COA, would it still require to be checked frequently or would the COA be enough to support the validation?

Also, is seal integrity something that I should consider as a CCP?

 

...

 

I'm guessing that was 80% N2.  

 

Having a headspace analyzer is probably worth it just to know your gas flush process is working, if you're already spending the money to purchase gas and a new packaging machine to use it.  You want to know you're actually putting the intended amount in the package, so when it comes time to evaluate if the process is adding value or achieving the intended goals you can have confidence it the result.

 

As others have suggested it doesn't seem like a safety issue as much as quality.  We use MAP for similar purposes and have never considered making it a CCP.  We still rework material if the gas flush fails, but for quality reasons.

[KTD]

I agree with all the above around quality and headspace measurement versus food safety. You need to determine which of the gases in your mixture has the greatest impact (ours is CO2) and what it's min or max range is. Can probably get away with a headspace analyzer for just that gas. Multiple gas testers get expensive fast...

 

Keith

[Alex A.]

Thank you all for all the information, it makes sense, we don't want to end up with browning meat due to incorrect gas flush. I will discuss this with the team and have a look into headspace analysers and set up some control checks. Probably will do more frequently at the beginning to make sure all is good and based on the data I can reduce the frequency. Any tips on headspace analysers, any brands or models?

 

Assuming your only talking about whole cuts not minced?? 

(minced is a different ballgame)

 

 

Yes, we will be doing whole cuts, not mince. Mince will be the next step if this first lot goes well, but that's a bit further away.

 

I'm guessing that was 80% N2.  

 

80% O2, we are doing High Oxygen for the product to be visually more appealing. Hi-Ox brings out the red colour of the beef and slows down browning.